- From: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 08:29:35 +0100
- To: SWD Working SWD <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of yesterday's telecon are now available for review at
[1]. As usual, text version also included below.
Cheers,
Sean
[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Semantic Web Deployment WG
29 Jul 2008
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/
0062.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-irc
Attendees
Present
Guus Schreiber, Antoine Isaac, Alistair Miles, Sean
Bechhofer, Diego Berrueta, Margherita Sini, Tom Baker, Jeremy
Carroll
Regrets
Ed Summers, Vit Novacek, Ralph Swick, Daniel Rubin
Chair
Guus Schreiber
Scribe
Sean Bechhofer
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Admin
2. [6]SKOS
3. [7]Vocabulary Management
4. [8]RDFa
5. [9]Recipes
* [10]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<Tom> Previous: [11]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
[11] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
Jeremy: introduces himself.
... representing TopQuadrant. Participation mainly for CR.
Guus: long telecon last time.
... some things being revisited on the list. Also possibly
... actions that are long gone.
Admin
Guus: propose to accept minutes
... no objections.
... next telecon 5th Aug. Guus regrets
... Two objectives in mind for these telecons. To get to LC for SKOS
and PR for RDFa
SKOS
Guus: Action items.
ACTION: Ed to investigate what text could be added to primer re.
concept co-ordination [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[CONTINUES]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02
Guus: My action re primer text. Is this still required?
Antoine: Can't quite recall.
ACTION: Guus to write primer text re: broaderGeneric and equivalence
w/r/t subclass [recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08]
[CONTINUES]
[13] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08
ACTION: Alistair to check the old namespace wrt dereferencing
[recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03] [DONE]
[14] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03
Alistair: Sent email some four weeks ago.
<Antoine>
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0094.h
tml
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/
0094.html
ACTION: Antoine and Ed to add content to Primer about irreflexivity
[recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06
<aliman> [17]email on old skos namespace dereference
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/
0095.html
ACTION: Alistar to update the history page adding direct link to
latest version of rdf triple [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[CONTINUES]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01
ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to specifically flag features at risk
for Last Call. [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17]
[CONTINUES]
[19] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17
ACTION: Sean to draft response to comment about namespace. [recorded
in [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12]
[DONE]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12
->
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0105.h
tml
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/
0105.html
<scribe> ACTION: Sean to post comment to OWL WG re annotation
requirements. [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[CONTINUES]
[22] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06
ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to propose a recommended minimum URI
dereference behaviour [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11] [DONE]
[23] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11
->
[24]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0004.h
tml
[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/
0004.html
ACTION: Guus to mail his position on issues 72, 73 and 75 to the
list [DROPPED] [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[25] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action10
ACTION: Alistair and Sean to propose text to implement the
resolution of issue-72 [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]
[26] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05
<aliman>
[27]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/master.html
[27] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/master.html
Guus: Which issues to we need to discuss here. Namespace and
broader/transitive
... would like to see if we need more discussion there. Also
... talk about LC schedule. When will drafts be available and
reviewers.
... Discussion of namespace issue.
... Is there reason to review our decision?
Alistair: Sent an email last week.
... Trying to think what pros and cons of each approach are.
... ->
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0034.h
tml
... A move to a new namespace has little upside and a lot of
downside.
... stick to old has advantages. All the existing stuff can be
claimed as implementations of
... SKOS. Also tools that are there already. A new namespace means
we have to wait for implementation
... plus there will be a period of time while people migrate, which
could take years.
... Realistically means tool developrs have to maintain multiple
implemetations.
... Bottom line is that there is little gain from a new namespace
and a cost involved.
... Assumed that the LC would use the new namespace, but marked as
"at risk".
... Would appreciate comments.
[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/
0034.html
Guus: I see objections, but no need to reopen the issue.
Alistair: Under what circumstances would we need to reopen the
issue?
Guus: if we reopen, we can't go to LC.
... saw one comment that the change in semantics requires a new
namespace (Simon Spero)
Alistair: unsure whether to take this comment. There may be some
misunderstanding of transitive.
Guus: Happy to mark it as "at risk".
Alistair: Ok
Antoine: Would like to discuss ISSUE 83. Semantics of concept scheme
containment
... some problems with the implementation. Alistair proposes a new
property to capture the
... semantics.
Guus: This seems rather drastic at this point.
<Antoine>
[29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0036.h
tml
[29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/
0036.html
<Antoine> -> start of the thread
Alistair: I think this is less drastic.
<aliman>
[30]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/0068.h
tml
[30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/
0068.html
<aliman> ex:cs skos:hasTopConcept ex:c.
Alistair: Email above contains resolution to the issues. Email
merely states an entailment.
<aliman> entails the graph:
<aliman> ex:c skos:inScheme ex:cs
Alistair: want to follow this entailment, but resolution doesn't
state how we go about making this happen.
... Spent some time thinking and what we're trying to say is that
skos:hasTopConcept has an inverse which is a
... subproperty of skos:inScheme
... Most obvious way to express this is to name the inverse and then
state it explicitly.
... if we don't name it then it requires an anonymous property. This
... could be a potential problem. Would appreciate input from
Jeremy.
Jeremy: OWL2 may be about to allow anonymous properties. One issue
is that it pushes
... you out of OWL DL. Can't use the anonymous property in a triple
(not as predicate).
... so in terms of describing the relationships, there's nothing
particularly wrong, but implementations
... may find it difficult. Procedurally, putting in an anonymous
property may cause trouble,
... but a new property might also cause problems.
Guus: But other things are not stated in the data model.
Alistair: There are two constraints expressed as prose, but there is
no way to do that in
... RDF or OWL. Here, it *is* possible to do it.
... Would avoid complication of anonymous properties.
Guus: Only require inverse of hasTopConcept or inScheme.
... topConceptOf would do the trick.
Alistair: Called it topConceptInScheme in Ref.
Guus: awful name!
Alistair: Subjective view. Not really worried about the naming.
Jeremy: is the intention to document the relationship within OWL.
Could one include this in
... a separate file with a seeAlso.
Alistair: If we can do it without jumping through hoops, why not do
it?
Guus: Surprised that other constraints can be expressed in RDF.
Alistair: All but two current. Would be three with this one.
Guus: WHat's the problem with three rather than two?
Alistair: For this one, we could do it.
Guus: But only at the cost of new vocabulary.
Alistair: But non-standard semantics is also costly.
Antoine: Can't see why my axiom is not valid OWL
Alistair: Entailments that follow are not valid RDF.
Jeremy: There is a bug with RDF (ter Horst). Significant problems
and adding an anonymous
... property would exercise that bug. Would advise against it.
Antoine: That's the argument I was looking for.
... Also assume a bug in the OWL specification then.
Jeremy: There is a need for a bug fix. But will not be done any time
soon.
Guus: We're not going there.
Jeremy: Cost of new predicate vs. non-standard. New predicate is
cheaper.
... preference would be to say nothing.
Guus: small cost with a small group.
Sean: preference for new predicate.
Guus: Suggest that Reference Editors make a proposal for this.
... Will reopen ISSUE 83, but expect a proposal to close with a new
property.
Alistair: Do we need to open the issue?
Guus: yes, need documented rationale.
... alternative is to open new issue and immediately propose closing
it.
... That might be better.
... for me topConceptOf would be an appropriate name.
... Propose a new issue which is then closed.
ACTION: Alistair to open issue relating to topConceptOf and propose
a resolution. [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action12]
[31] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action12
Guus: Any more w.r.t content?
Antoine: happy
Guus: Margherita reviewed, but reviewed the old draft.
... chance for a new draft next week?
Alistair: Think so. Resolutions to things are done. Need to mark at
rsik and some editorial stuff.
Guus: Earliest possible for LC decision is August 19th.
... problem for Guus as on holiday. Could review but only in next
two days.
Alistair: Have to finish this week.
Guus: Could do it if it's there by Friday.
Alistair: Could provide a link which will be pretty much the version
we publish.
Guus: Can expect cmments by the 12th, one week for discussion and a
decision about LC
... on the 19th.
... would be preferable if at the same point we have a primer draft
consistent with the Reference.
Antoine: Feasible apart from action on co-ordination.
... Version of the primer for the 19th?
Guus: Would also like to take a decision about publishing primer on
19th.
... agenda item for next week will be scheduling.
... also need to discuss LC period given that
... publishing will take a few days. 5-6 week period is appropriate.
... end September/beginning October.
Sean: some traffic on the list about broader/broaderTransitive.
Guus: no new arguments there. No real evidence to reopen this.
Alistair: i'd agree. Concerned about how many people misunderstand
this.
... not a technical problem, but perhaps some confusion with names.
... its a shame that people are misunderstanding this.
Sean: Question of education rather than technical details.
Antoine: Whatever the names, the pattern will be the same, and
that's
... hard for people to get.
Guus: Will pay attention to this.
Jeremy: Is a simple example more accessible? Parent/Ancestor etc?
Sean: is the reference an appropriate place for this?
Antoine: Could put some drawings in the primer.
Alistair: Antoine's slide at the SKOS event was very clear.
Antoine: Animated.
Guus: Could make snapshots.
Guus: Parent/ancestor is already a long way towards this.
Vocabulary Management
Guus: nobody here
RDFa
Guus: nobody here
<aliman> [32]ISKO event with link to antoine's slides
[32] http://www.iskouk.org/SKOS_July2008.htm
ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with
assistance from Michael) [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[CONTINUES]
[33] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14
Recipes
Guus: Recipes?
Diego: Document is ready to be published. Ralph has not had time
... to do it.
... will try to publish asap
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes
implementations] [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[CONTINUES]
[34] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
ACTION: Jon and Ralph to publish Recipes as Working Group Note
[recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[CONTINUES]
[35] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03
Jeremy: back to RDFa, at call on Thursday, hope to get WG approval
on 19th.
... reviewers to be appointed for 5th.
Guus: Only need review for implementation report. WG should check
that we've met the conditions.
... not like reviewing a regular document
Jeremy: Only major change was on Primer. HTML vs XHTML issue.
Guus: useful background
... next telecon 5th August, then 19th August
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Alistair to open issue relating to topConceptOf and
propose a resolution. [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action12]
[36] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action12
[PENDING] ACTION: Alistar to update the history page adding direct
link to latest version of rdf triple [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for
RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ed to investigate what text could be added to
primer re. concept co-ordination [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[PENDING] ACTION: Guus to write primer text re: broaderGeneric and
equivalence w/r/t subclass [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08]
[PENDING] ACTION: Jon and Ralph to publish Recipes as Working Group
Note [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of
Recipes implementations] [recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[PENDING] ACTION: Sean to post comment to OWL WG re annotation
requirements. [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[PENDING] ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to specifically flag
features at risk for Last Call. [recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17]
[37] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01
[38] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14
[39] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02
[40] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08
[41] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03
[42] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
[43] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06
[44] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17
[DONE] ACTION: Alistair to check the old namespace wrt dereferencing
[recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[DONE] ACTION: Antoine and Ed to add content to Primer about
irreflexivity [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[DONE] ACTION: Sean to draft response to comment about namespace.
[recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12]
[DONE] ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to propose a recommended
minimum URI dereference behaviour [recorded in
[48]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11]
[DONE] ACTION: Alistair and Sean to propose text to implement the
resolution of issue-72 [recorded in
[49]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05]
[45] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03
[46] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06
[47] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12
[48] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11
[49] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05
[DROPPED] ACTION: Guus to mail his position on issues 72, 73 and 75
to the list [recorded in
[50]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[50] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html#action10
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [51]scribe.perl version 1.133
([52]CVS log)
$Date: 2008/07/29 19:50:09 $
[51] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/
scribedoc.htm
[52] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester
sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk
http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 07:29:53 UTC